SKYO wrote:Or would you guys do the unthinkable/up-the-stakes and blockbuster this bitch ... Edler for Kane!

--To Van - KaneTo Wpg - Booth, Hansen, Jensen, a 1st, Conditional 3rd (if Kane scores 25+ goals), and Hamhuis.*If Booth can't pick up his game a decent bit, I doubt the deal goes through. There's already not that big of a chance it does even if his game improves - Kanes a young pure goal scorer.*We retain 25% of Booth's salary to make it cap compliant.

Tell me, are you off your meds again? Take out Hamhuis, Hansen or Jensen and retain 0% of Booths cap hit and I'd think of it. Hell I'd even through in a truckload of bibles to keek Boothy warm and happy in Winterpeg.--

Also if we could add Turris or Johannson for 2C, that'd be real nice, but idk if we have the assets for Turris after the Kane Trade...--To Van - JohanssonTo Wsh - Schroeder, Weise, Dalpe, Welsh, Alberts, a 2nd, and a 2nd in 2015.

maybe kane is a great natural scorer.. but his rep as a douchebag is growing too.. Not sure how much of this is bs.. but he might be a problem child ?http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu ... 10484.html other than that RyanGinger I would hate to see our D corp weakened and losing draft picks plus prospects means we got to win it in the next couple years ?

Jovocop wrote:Tanev for Matthias? That would also open up a roster spot for Corrado.

I'd do that! Still would like to trade Booth!

I have come to the conclusion after years of research (meaning a few youtube videos) that Matthias should be the one MG should acquire as he can play wing and center. C/W is the key with added size (to help deal with bigger teams like SJ), as that would give the Canucks crucial depth down the middle when/if injuries occur.

Somehow some way, with the thinking that nothing is impossible! Booth has to be dealt so we can trade for Matthias so he can be added to our 3rd line, that or just trade Tanev for Matthias where we would have superb forward depth all of a sudden.

But anyways if it's Booth traded and Matthias is added, this allows a lot of flexibility in the lineup and numerous center backup plans.

So with internet rumours around, probably started by Eklund, that both Giroux and Eberle could be shopped, I say we go hard to land one of them. Both Edmonton and the Flyers covet, need, defence and goaltending. Flyers need a full injection of life and someone to score.

For us to land either we would have to sacrifice a lot and shed salary. Obviously trading with Edmonton, within the division, is always tricky.

Really sucks that teams like Edmonton, Philadelphia and the Panthers didn't see what everyone else saw with respect to their goaltending, last summer. What could have been. But that was then and this is now, what would you to to,land either Giroux or Eberle?

I have always loved Eberle. To me he is a complete player. Giroux on the other hand has shown, briefly, that he can carry a team. Either would cost us a Bieksa or Edler type. I would do Edler straight up for either, only because I think he would be more attractive to either team age wise.

Hockey Widow wrote:So with internet rumours around, probably started by Eklund, that both Giroux and Eberle could be shopped, I say we go hard to land one of them. Both Edmonton and the Flyers covet, need, defence and goaltending. Flyers need a full injection of life and someone to score.

For us to land either we would have to sacrifice a lot and shed salary. Obviously trading with Edmonton, within the division, is always tricky.

Really sucks that teams like Edmonton, Philadelphia and the Panthers didn't see what everyone else saw with respect to their goaltending, last summer. What could have been. But that was then and this is now, what would you to to,land either Giroux or Eberle?

I have always loved Eberle. To me he is a complete player. Giroux on the other hand has shown, briefly, that he can carry a team. Either would cost us a Bieksa or Edler type. I would do Edler straight up for either, only because I think he would be more attractive to either team age wise.

I wouldn't risk moving a defender unless we're getting one in return.

And yes - this is quite ironic since when I first arrived here as The Brown Knight, I flirted with the idea of moving a Top 4 defenseman for a Top 6 Forward. However - based on the studies that I conducted (see: $64,000,000 thread), I no longer am a proponent of that idea.

I like where we are as an organization right now.

Keep everything as is.

Wait for the cap to go up. Buy out Booth at some point. See if Shinkaruk and Horvat can become impact players with their ELC's, while the twins, Kesler, and Lou play at their current levels. That right there is key.

Outside of that - I don't see much of a reason to do anything at this point.

Moving a defenseman and/or prospects for an expensive impact player in return is not worth the risk in my opinion. And yes - this might be the first time in history where I'm actually a proponent of NOT making any changes right now.

Hockey Widow wrote:I have always loved Eberle. To me he is a complete player. Giroux on the other hand has shown, briefly, that he can carry a team. Either would cost us a Bieksa or Edler type. I would do Edler straight up for either, only because I think he would be more attractive to either team age wise.

I think either would cost you a lot more... I think Edler, Horvat/Shink, Draft pick. The cost for Giroux would be huge, and given the Schnieds-Edmonton trade rumours at the draft I think the cost for Eberle is higher for Vancouver than the rest of the league.

Rumours are floating about that Eberle could be going to the Flyers for a package consisting of B.Schenn/Couturier and a Simmonds/Coburn type.

IMO, the Oilers won't deal with us, and we don't have the pieces to send for Giroux. I think the Flyers would want Kesler+ in any Giroux deal.

Hockey Widow wrote:So with internet rumours around, probably started by Eklund, that both Giroux and Eberle could be shopped, I say we go hard to land one of them. Both Edmonton and the Flyers covet, need, defence and goaltending. Flyers need a full injection of life and someone to score.

For us to land either we would have to sacrifice a lot and shed salary. Obviously trading with Edmonton, within the division, is always tricky.

Really sucks that teams like Edmonton, Philadelphia and the Panthers didn't see what everyone else saw with respect to their goaltending, last summer. What could have been. But that was then and this is now, what would you to to,land either Giroux or Eberle?

I have always loved Eberle. To me he is a complete player. Giroux on the other hand has shown, briefly, that he can carry a team. Either would cost us a Bieksa or Edler type. I would do Edler straight up for either, only because I think he would be more attractive to either team age wise.

I wouldn't risk moving a defender unless we're getting one in return.

Gotta agree with ya BK about losing a defender.....

But.....

First off I don't like Giroux. He's too streaky. Carried the Flyers, but has dropped off considerably over the last while.....this year he is doing nothing. I do, however, think that Eberle is the way to go, and if Edmonton is shopping one of their kids I can't believe they are that stupid to shop JE over the other three.

If the Oilers would take Edler, Jensen, and a pick (not a first) ink exchange for Eberle, and IF the Sabers would give us Ehrhoff for Booth and something, then I pull the trigger.

Sedin-Sedin-Kesler-Eberle-Burrows-Kassian-Higgins-Hansen-Santorelli.

That is a top 9 that would have most coaches, GMs, and fans, alike, creaming themselves. It's totally interchangeable. You have 3 top line playmakers, 2 more that can fill in, several scorers, some size, grit, strength, speed, defensive smarts, and loads of talent that is distributed over a good balance of age and experience. And with Torts as the coach who often only rides 9 horses down the stretch, the 4th line is irrelevant, but if you can build it around a guy like Richardson, that only leads me to think it wouldn't be a disaster.

On the back end.....

Ehrhoff-Garrison-Hamhuis-Tanev-Bieksa-Stanton-Corrado

Can't complain about that.

Draft a defender in the first round who has some size and strength and likes to hit.

Hockey Widow wrote:I have always loved Eberle. To me he is a complete player. Giroux on the other hand has shown, briefly, that he can carry a team. Either would cost us a Bieksa or Edler type. I would do Edler straight up for either, only because I think he would be more attractive to either team age wise.

I think either would cost you a lot more... I think Edler, Horvat/Shink, Draft pick. The cost for Giroux would be huge, and given the Schnieds-Edmonton trade rumours at the draft I think the cost for Eberle is higher for Vancouver than the rest of the league.

Rumours are floating about that Eberle could be going to the Flyers for a package consisting of B.Schenn/Couturier and a Simmonds/Coburn type.

IMO, the Oilers won't deal with us, and we don't have the pieces to send for Giroux. I think the Flyers would want Kesler+ in any Giroux deal.

You are, in all likelihood, right with that. But I think any package that the Oilers take in exchange for Eberle will see a top goaltender or defenseman going back the other way. Edmonton's problem right now is that they can't keep pucks out of their own net. I'd offer them Edler and Lack in a package for Eberle. Eddie isn't ready, but he looks promising. We have a cushion to get a goaltender to replace Lou is a few years. Offering them a top pairing (according to some) defenseman in Edler, and a legitimate top prospect between the pipes, would certainly get a discussion going.

Couturier and Schenn aren't what Edmonton needs right now. More youth that tops out as 2nd/3rd line talent? They have some sandpaper in their bottom 6 already.....and personally I think Couturier is overrated by many.